POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

5 DECEMBER 2013

REVIEW OF POLLING DISTRICTS AND POLLING PLACES

REPORT BY THE HEAD OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE (PROPER OFFICER FOR ELECTORAL PURPOSES)

SUMMARY

The process of keeping polling districts and polling places under review is a statutory function of the Council and as of 1 October 2013, reviews must be conducted every five years. During this review Ward boundaries cannot be altered in any way as this is a function of the Local Government Boundary Commission for .

This report details the review of all polling districts and polling places within the Borough that has been undertaken over recent weeks and the proposals for changes to polling districts in one Ward that are put forward.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council

It is proposed that it be RECOMMENDED to Council that -

1. No alterations are made to polling district boundaries or polling places in Alexandra, Beverley, Canbury, North and Hook, Chessington South, Coombe Hill, Coombe Vale, , , St James, St Marks, Hill, & Hook Rise and Tudor Wards.

2. The proposed alterations to polling district boundaries in Ward set out in the report as shown on the Plan at Annex 2 are agreed.

3. The Councillor to Electorate ratio in Canbury, St Marks and Tolworth and Hook Rise Wards in particular be kept under review so that, if necessary and appropriate, a request can be made to the Local Government Boundary Commission to undertake a ward Boundary review in the event of the ratio in those Wards (or any others) varying from the Borough average by more than 30%.

4. The position in relation to polling places generally (and particularly in Canbury, Grove, Tolworth and Hook Rise and Tudor Wards) be kept under review and proposals for any necessary or desirable changes be brought forward for consideration as and when appropriate.

5. The whole of polling district JB in Tolworth and Hook Rise Ward be designated as a polling place for that area and the Returning Officer, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, the Leader of the Opposition and Ward Councillors, be authorised to locate the polling place at a suitable venue if it is not possible to retain the use of the One Stop Shop site in Cox Lane.

6. Further consideration be given to the proposal to reduce, from four to three, the

D:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000492\M00007064\AI00022256\$3ymflfgo.docx

number of polling districts in Tudor Ward in the context of the further work to be undertaken to identify an alternative polling place for polling district VA once the North Kingston Centre is no longer available.

7. The Council’s practice in relation to the use of Schools for electoral purposes be varied to provide that, in those instances where there are no suitable alternatives within the area concerned, consideration will be given to making use of School premises.

8. Polling district boundaries and polling places continue to be kept under review following each election and a full review is undertaken every five years in line with legislation

Reason for action proposed

To respond to issues identified during the review of polling districts and polling places that has been undertaken.

BACKGROUND

1. The Electoral Administration and Registration Act 2013 makes an alteration to section 18C of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (review of polling districts and places), for subsections (1) to (5) substitute –

(1) A relevant authority must during each compulsory review period carry out and complete— (a) a review under section 18A of all the polling districts in its area, and (b) a review under section 18B of all the polling places in its area. (2) The compulsory review periods are— (a) the period of 16 months beginning with 1st October 2013, and (b) the period of 16 months beginning with 1st October of every fifth year after that.

In undertaking the review the local authority must:

• Publish a notice of the holding of a review;

• Consult the (Acting) Returning Officer (A)RO for every parliamentary constituency which is wholly or partly in its area;

• Publish the representations from the (A)RO within 30 days of receipt and in the prescribed manner;

• Seek representations from such persons that it thinks has particular expertise in relation to access to premises or facilities for persons who have different forms of disability;

• Allow any elector in any constituency which is wholly or partly in the area to make representations which may include proposals for alternative polling places. 2. On completion of a review the authority must give reasons for its decisions and publish such other information as is prescribed.

3. Details of existing polling district boundaries are available on the Council’s website and will be displayed at the meeting. Details of polling places and their electorates (as at 3 June 2013) are set out in Annex 1. POLLING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND POLLING PLACES – LEGAL FRAMEWORK

4. Polling districts are a geographical area created by a sub-division of a constituency or Ward. 5. A polling place is the building or area in which polling stations will be selected by the (A)RO. Polling places should be within the polling district it serves, unless there are special circumstances that make it desirable to designate an area outside the district (such as a complete lack of suitable buildings within the polling district). 6. A polling station is the room or area within the polling place where voting takes place. Unlike polling districts and polling places which are fixed by the local authority, polling stations are chosen by the (A)RO for the election. 7. The Council is responsible for dividing the local authority area in to polling districts for parliamentary elections. When designating polling districts and polling places the local authority must seek to ensure that all electors in the constituency have such reasonable facilities for voting as are practical in the circumstances. The Council should also seek to ensure that so far as is reasonable and practicable, the polling places are accessible to those with mobility problems and that when considering or reviewing the designation of a polling place, have regard to the accessibility needs of disabled persons. 8. The last full review of polling districts and polling places was completed in 2011 and, whilst there have not been any alterations to polling district boundaries since this time, there have been some changes to polling places which are kept under on-going review.

CONSULTATIONS UNDERTAKEN

9. A formal consultation period ran from 1 Oct 2013 to 12 November 2013. A public notice was published and details of the review, including an online survey, were placed on the Council’s website. In addition the following specific consultations were undertaken: a) An email to all Members of the Council that gave details of the review. An email with similar explanatory notes to each of the political parties known to be operating in the Borough b) An email to the Chief Executive of the London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames as the (A)RO for the parliamentary constituency c) An email to Kingston Centre for Independent Living in their ‘umbrella’ capacity. 10. Feedback was also requested from Presiding Officers, Polling Station Inspectors, electors and other stakeholders regarding the current polling scheme.

11. It is a statutory requirement that the (A)RO comments on the current polling stations and any proposed alternatives. Feedback from the polling station staff formed the basis of the (A)RO’s comments. Staff in Electoral Services provided feedback on the current polling scheme for the (A)RO of Richmond Park parliamentary constituency to comment on this feedback.

12. The main thrust of the responses from the consultation is reflected in this report. However, this feedback will be made available on the Council’s website and will form part of the formal document the Council is required to publish on completion of this review.

POPULATION/ELECTORATE PROJECTIONS

13. Any potential growth (or reduction) in the electorate is a factor which might impact on the size of a polling district and/or the optimum location of polling places. The Borough’s population has continued to grow in recent years and that trend is predicted to continue for the foreseeable future. On the basis of the latest GLA projections, the 18+ population of the Borough is predicted to be 128,058 in 2014, rising to 130,972 in 2018 and reaching 133,724 in 2022. Of course, the 18+ population does not translate directly into electorate numbers as not everyone in the Borough will be eligible for inclusion on the Register of Electors and, for various reasons, not all of those who are eligible want to register. However, it is a good ‘proxy’ on which to base this review. 14. As was the case with the review undertaken in 2011, information from the Council’s Planning Department highlighted Canbury and Tolworth and Hook Rise Wards as areas where there could be significant growth to the population and, thus, electorate over the next four/five years and this has been taken into account in the consideration of proposals for these areas. 15. So far as Canbury ward is concerned the Ward already has the largest electorate in the Borough and the 18+ population is projected to increase by some 5.4% between 2014 and 2018. This projection does not, however, take into account any development which might take place on what is referred to as the North Kingston Development site for which a Planning Brief has recently been issued. This site lies within Polling District T and comprises the area bounded by Richmond Road, Sopwith Way, Sury Basin and Seven Kings Way, incorporating the former Gas Holders site, Canbury Place car park and the Kingston College Annexe. The Planning Brief envisages a new residential and learning mixed use quarter which could see a further significant increase in electorate for that particular Polling District, though possibly not within the time frame of this current review. 16. In the event of a significant residential development proceeding on the site it may be appropriate to consider requesting the Local Government Boundary Commission to undertake a Ward boundary review as the Councillor to electorate ratio for Canbury would be significantly higher than for other Wards. The Commission’s guidance states that such reviews can be initiated in the following circumstances:

• More than 30% of a Council’s Wards having an electoral imbalance of more than 10% from the average ratio for that Authority; and/or

• One or more Ward with an electoral imbalance of more than 30%; and

• The imbalance is unlikely to be corrected by foreseeable changes to the electorate within a reasonable period 17. An analysis of the Councillor/Electorate ratio for all Wards has revealed that currently it is only Canbury Ward that has an Electoral imbalance of more than 10% from the average ratio for the Council. On the basis of the latest (November 2013) Electorate figures the average ratio for the Authority is 1:2352.5 whilst the figure for Canbury is 1:2736 . At the moment the imbalance within Canbury Ward is not more than 30% from the Borough average though, clearly, in the event of the North Kingston Site

development taking place that could be the case. Thus it is proposed that the position be kept under review on the basis that in the event of the imbalance exceeding the 30% threshold consideration could be given to requesting a formal Ward boundary review. 18. Tolworth and Hook Rise ward has a projected 18+ population of 8,035 at 2014 which is predicted to rise by some 5.87% by 2018. This does not, however, take into account any development that might take place on what has become known as the ‘Tesco’ site adjacent to the A3 in Polling District JB. As with Canbury, the position in relation to the Councillor/Electorate ratio (currently 1:2336) will need to be kept under review in the event of that development proceeding. 19. Whilst the electorate for Polling District JB is currently relatively low the existing Polling place takes the form of a mobile facility at the One Stop Shop (formerly the Maverick Public House) in Cox Lane which is unlikely to be able to absorb a significant increase in electorate. It is to be hoped, however, that any comprehensive development on the ‘Tesco’ site would include some form of community facility that could be used as a Polling Place. 20. It is also worth mentioning at this point that the move to Individual Electoral Registration could impact on the size of the overall electorate for some areas, particularly those where there is a significant student population living in Halls of Residence. This is because under the new system it will no longer be possible to register students in Halls of Residence en masse and we will be reliant on each student completing and returning an individual Electoral Registration form. Thus it is possible in Wards such as St Mark’s where there is a relatively high student population the electorate could fall by enough as a consequence of the transition to IER to potentially trigger a ward boundary review. ISSUES HIGHLIGHTED ABOUT THE CURRENT POLLING SCHEME AND PROPOSED CHANGES

21. Since the last review in 2011 issues have been highlighted about a number of polling places ranging from the general location of the polling station and its proximity to the majority of the electorate to the size of the venue and its transportation links. 22. Electoral Services staff made visits to all polling places where concerns were raised and inspected them using guidance from Scope and the Electoral Commission. Similar visits were made to venues identified as possible polling places. 23. The following paragraphs set out details of the issues raised, including those raised through the consultation process; the options considered to address those issues; and the proposals recommended for adoption. No significant issues were raised in relation to Alexandra, Beverley, Chessington North and Hook, Chessington South, Coombe Hill, Coombe Vale, Norbiton, Old Malden, St James, St Marks or Surbiton Hill Wards so they are not referred to in this part of the report.

Berrylands Ward

24. The finding of a suitable polling place for polling district A has been a problem for many years. The current venue, The Berrylands Hotel has poor access for people with mobility problems and the room used as the polling place is relatively small. Thus, as a result of the 2011 review, the polling place was moved to the Berrylands Christian Centre in King Charles Rd. This, however, proved to be somewhat unpopular with both electors and political parties due to its limited size, location at the opposite end of the

polling district to the Berrylands Hotel and relative lack of parking facilities. For the recent Berrylands Ward By-election we reverted to the Berrylands Hotel.

25. Whilst, ideally, it would be useful to find an alternative venue, the Berrylands Hotel is very well located within the polling district, particularly in view of its proximity to Berrylands Station and the local shops. In order to reduce the potential impact of the access issues it is proposed to redraw polling district boundaries so as to reduce the size of the Electorate that would use the venue. By extending the polling district boundary eastwards along Berrylands Road to its junction with The Roystons, and then taking it in a southerly direction to the Ward boundary, as shown on the Plan at Annexe 2, the electorate for polling district A would decrease by around 1,000 Electors with a corresponding increase for polling district AA.

At the same time it is proposed that the potential for identifying any funding opportunities for undertaking works at The Berrylands Hotel to improve access be explored. This, clearly, would need to be done in consultation with the owners of the Hotel.

Canbury Ward

26. As already indicated Canbury Ward is the largest Ward in terms of electorate and is predicted to grow further over coming years. Whilst we already have four polling places within the Ward to cope with the electorate there is a particular issue regarding polling district T where the population/electorate is growing particularly on the river side of the Richmond Road and potentially will grow significantly further if the North Kingston Development Site is ultimately developed. The existing polling place for polling district T is Swinnerton Hall, St Luke’s Church, Gibbon Road but a potential alternative location has been identified on the Kingston College site in Richmond Road. Whilst this is also included in the North Kingston Development site it is unlikely that any redevelopment will take place imminently and, thus, serious consideration has been given to moving the polling station to that site. The location is more central within the polling district and is situated closer to the town centre and, in particular, the railway station. The building itself is accessible from the point of view of people with disabilities and has good facilities for polling station staff. However, the College have unfortunately advised that they would have no facilities available on the day of the next election, 22 May.

Other alternative venues explored for polling district T include the Health Centre in Skerne Road, the sports and fitness club adjacent to Sainsbury’s and the Pavilion Cafe in , albeit the latter is outside the Ward boundary. Unfortunately, for various reasons, none of these proved practical or appropriate. A further possibility would be the stationing of a mobile facility on the car park outside the Sainsbury store. This would be a good central location but there are additional costs associated with mobile facilities and, by and large, we are trying to reduce reliance on them. Thus it is proposed that, for the time being at least, Swinnerton Hall remains the polling place for polling district T but that the search for a suitable alternative venue within or near by the polling district continues.

27. The polling place for polling district TB is currently the Milaap Centre which is located at Murray House. Whilst there is some uncertainty regarding the future of Murray House this is unlikely to impact on the use of the premises as a polling station for the Combined Elections in May 2014. However, it may well be necessary to look for an alternative venue for the 2015 Parliamentary Election.

Grove Ward 28. St Raphael’s Church, Portsmouth Road was designated as a polling place as part of the 2011 review and whilst, in itself, a very good venue, there have been a small number of complaints about the lack of public transport along the Portsmouth Road. However, a review of potential venues within the polling district has not so far found a suitable alternative. Tolworth and Hook Rise Ward 29. As indicated earlier in this report, the polling place for polling district JB is a mobile facility located at the ‘one stop shop’ (formerly The Maverick Public House) and there are currently some questions that are still to be resolved over the extent to which it will be possible to again locate a mobile facility on that particular site. Earlier work to identify alternative locations had not yielded anything suitable within the Ward other than the Bowls Club premises on King George’s field which, whilst suitable in themselves as a venue with reasonable parking, are some distance from the main centre of population in the polling district. Whilst hopefully, it will be possible to continue with the mobile facility in its present location against the possibility that a change has to be made it is proposed that the whole of the polling district be designated as the polling place which will leave flexibility to the Returning Officer, in consultation with appropriate Members, to find an alternative location, most likely for the mobile facility. Tudor Ward

30. The polling place for polling district VA is the Richmond and Kingston Accessible Transport premises on the North Kingston Centre site. Given the plans for the redevelopment of the site as a Free School an alternative venue will need to be found. However, whilst proposals are being developed for the decant of existing users from the North Kingston site it is envisaged that these (and other) premises will be available for the May 2014 Elections. Thereafter an alternative venue is likely to be needed and discussions are currently taking place with Fernhill Primary School which is situated nearby.

31. In response to the consultation the Richmond Park Conservative Association has suggested that Tudor Ward should revert to three polling districts. It is suggested that is an option that can be looked at in more detail when there is further clarity on polling places for polling district VA and that, for the time being, no action be taken on this suggestion.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

32. As will be apparent from this and earlier such reports the identification of premises within the Borough suitable for use as polling places continues to be problematic. This position is often compounded when new developments take place in an area without a consequential provision of community facilities.

33. Over recent years we have progressively moved away from using School premises as polling places given the potential disruption, security considerations etc. Notwithstanding the wishes of individual schools the Council is, in fact, in a position to require any School premise funded through public money (including Academies) to be made available for use as a polling station. Given the increasing difficulty in finding

suitable venues consideration should, perhaps, be given to making greater use of that power bearing in mind that, for most elections, the date will be known a considerable time in advance giving individual Schools plenty of opportunity to make alternative arrangements.

AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE REVIEW

34. In addition to the new polling district boundaries being used to publish the revised register, this data will also be installed in to the Council’s GIS system to allow electors to locate their polling place on the Council’s website. This will also allow for the production of Borough, Ward and Polling District maps, and a letter will be sent to all affected electors advising them of the change.

TIMESCALE

35. Decisions arising from this review which affect polling district boundaries must be taken by the end of December so they can be reflected on the revised Register of Electors which will be published on 17 February 2014.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

36. The cost of sending letters to all electors (approx 1,000) affected by this review will be relatively small and will be found from within existing budgets.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

37. To comply with the Representation of the People Act 1983 Sections 18A – 18D relating to the provision that every constituency shall be divided into polling districts and subject to the provisions of this section there shall be a polling place designated for each polling district.

38. Under the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013, all local authorities are required by law to carry out a review of polling districts within 16 months of 1 st October 2013 and to this same timeframe every five years (ie a further review must take place within 16 months of 1 st October 2018).

RISK ASSESSMENT

39. A number of risks have been identified and outlined below along with actions to reduce the level of risk.

40. Inputting any boundary alterations in to the electoral registration software poses risks due to the high volume of properties that are affected by the proposals; the requirement to manually input the boundaries; the short timescale to undertake this; and that this can only be done towards the end of the annual canvass which is already a busy time for Electoral Services. Electoral Services are working with the Borough’s GIS team to undertake a full cross-reference of addresses to ensure that properties are allocated to the correct polling district.

41. Despite advertising a change to a polling place on poll cards, experience has shown that a minority of electors will still attend their previous polling place to vote. Following the publication of the revised register it is proposed to write to all electors who are affected by this review. Signage will be displayed at previous polling places to direct

electors to the correct polling place. The alteration to polling places will be publicised by working with the Communications Team in the run up to the 2014 Borough and European Parliamentary elections.

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS

42. A full Equality Impact Assessment was carried out for the 2011 review and has been revisited as part of this review. This Assessment highlighted the need to find an alternative location for the polling place in polling district A as the current venue (the Berrylands Hotel) is the only venue inaccessible to wheelchair users.

43. If the proposals outlined in this report are approved there will still be an issue in relation to the accessibility of the Berrylands Hotel but its impact will have been reduced by reducing the number of electors using that polling place. In the longer term if it proves possible to identify an appropriate funding source to allow improvement works to be undertaken the problem should be overcome. Otherwise all polling places within the Borough are accessible to wheelchair users.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

44. So far as possible polling places have been proposed that are reasonably central within the polling place and accessible by public transport to try and reduce the need for electors to travel to them by car.

Background papers : held by Andrew Bessant (Author of report) Tel; 020 8547 4628, e-mail: [email protected]

• Circular EC19/2010 – Review of polling districts, polling places and polling stations (the Electoral Commission, July 2010)

• Polls Apart 2010 – Opening elections to disabled people (Scope, July 2010)

• Review of Polling Districts and Polling Places, Report to Policy and Resources Committee on 29 September 2011

• Responses from the consultations undertaken

• Comments from the (Acting) Returning Officer – Richmond Park Parliamentary Constituency

• Local Government Boundary Commission Guidance